Oil price at 4 year low but still V high fuel surcharges
Oct 10, 2014, 1:16 pm
#62
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,378
Though your example is accurately itemised regardless (assuming that in your example Tesco had a specified retailer surcharge). I think what you mean is that it's vague. Which again, I and virtually no-one else cares about. The receipt could itemise every business cost Tesco incurs detailing what proportion of my purchase goes towards each one - as long as the total price is the price that the sign indicated it would be, I really couldn't care less.
Oct 10, 2014, 3:49 pm
#63
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly AUS or rural England
Programs: BAEC redundant Bronze, AAdvantage Lifetime PLT, CO, WN, B6
Posts: 6,526
It isn't remotely a con and it is clearly itemised, so there are no "smoke and mirrors" involved either. To a consumer buying revenue fares it makes no difference whatsoever whether the fare is Ł500 or Ł200 + Ł300 YQ. For a consumer buying an avios fare it makes no difference whatsoever whether the surcharge is Ł300 YQ or a Ł300 redemption surcharge. What exactly are you objecting to - are you really this annoyed just because of the description they put next to the charge? (I'm assuming you're well aware that the charge will always be there in some form - whether it's rolled into the fare price or called something different?)
If you purchase a revenue fare from BA a part of the bargain is that you'll receive additional value in the form of future travel, after you've paid some surcharges and taxes.
The problem is:
And you still think the airlines aren't sailing extremely close to the wind?
It frankly amazes me the punters put up with it and the airlines haven't already been taken to task by the various consumer protection bodies who seem to have their collective heads in the sand over this.
Oct 11, 2014, 2:01 am
#64
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,205
When the alternative is not having a frequent flyer scheme, I'm happy with what we currently get. And make no mistake: that is the alternative. Consumer outcry, legal action, whatever will not accomplish a happy magic land where YQ doesn't exist, you can use Avios to buy the last seat on any plane, and you can get CX F from JFK-HKG for 100 Avios and tuppence ha'penny.
Oct 11, 2014, 4:25 am
#65
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
If you moved the YQ back into the fare, then presumably all Avios redemption bands would just need to have a substantial cash component.
Oct 11, 2014, 6:05 am
#66
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from FRA to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a BA F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł179.50 (but this is easily explained because BA F is widely viewed as 2.76x better than CX F
)The carrier charge for a BA F flight from JFK to LHR is Ł259.40 (this is explained because of Chase giving away all those damn Avios
)Look at the figures, look at the distances, look at the carriers.
EDIT: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=FRA-HKG;+LHR-HKG;+JFK-LHR
Oh, and remember that 241 voucher that's "saving" you so much? Could it just be that BA is clawing that saving back via inflated YQ on its metal?
Oct 11, 2014, 6:24 am
#67
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,158
I actually believe that the regulations requiring airlines to always advertise the full price of any service should apply here. So, BA should be compelled to say JFK-LHR-JFK costs 120K Avios plus $1000 in F. The Avios and cash components must be given equal prominence. I also believe that Chase should only be allowed to advertise their 2-4-1 vouchers when giving equal prominence to additional charges. For example, "get our card and 2 of you can go to London in Club World for $2000."
No argument as to if the fees are justified or not. YQ has been used instead of increasing redemption levels, that is clear, and unfortunately a fact of life. For cash tickets it makes no real difference anyway.
No argument as to if the fees are justified or not. YQ has been used instead of increasing redemption levels, that is clear, and unfortunately a fact of life. For cash tickets it makes no real difference anyway.
Oct 11, 2014, 6:29 am
#68
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Programs: Aadvantage Gold
Posts: 549
Funny you should mention CX F. Some numbers:
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from FRA to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a BA F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł179.50 (but this is easily explained because BA F is widely viewed as 2.76x better than CX F )
The carrier charge for a BA F flight from JFK to LHR is Ł259.40 (this is explained because of Chase giving away all those damn Avios )
Look at the figures, look at the distances, look at the carriers.
EDIT: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=FRA-HKG;+LHR-HKG;+JFK-LHR
Oh, and remember that 241 voucher that's "saving" you so much? Could it just be that BA is clawing that saving back via inflated YQ on its metal?
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from FRA to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a CX F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł65
The carrier charge for a BA F flight from LHR to HKG is Ł179.50 (but this is easily explained because BA F is widely viewed as 2.76x better than CX F
)The carrier charge for a BA F flight from JFK to LHR is Ł259.40 (this is explained because of Chase giving away all those damn Avios
)Look at the figures, look at the distances, look at the carriers.
EDIT: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=FRA-HKG;+LHR-HKG;+JFK-LHR
Oh, and remember that 241 voucher that's "saving" you so much? Could it just be that BA is clawing that saving back via inflated YQ on its metal?
It's decreased several times in the last few months.
Oct 11, 2014, 7:25 am
#69
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,378
To me this is essentially a labelling issue. Why should a bit more honesty by BA on their prices vs the external taxes and fees (government- and airport- levied) mean they'd have to shut the entire scheme down? If you belive some FTers all the information is there anyway if you dig hard enough.
If you moved the YQ back into the fare, then presumably all Avios redemption bands would just need to have a substantial cash component.
If you moved the YQ back into the fare, then presumably all Avios redemption bands would just need to have a substantial cash component.
Oct 11, 2014, 8:59 am
#70
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,205
To me this is essentially a labelling issue. Why should a bit more honesty by BA on their prices vs the external taxes and fees (government- and airport- levied) mean they'd have to shut the entire scheme down? If you belive some FTers all the information is there anyway if you dig hard enough.
If you moved the YQ back into the fare, then presumably all Avios redemption bands would just need to have a substantial cash component.
If you moved the YQ back into the fare, then presumably all Avios redemption bands would just need to have a substantial cash component.
*I'm using advertise in the traditional sense of "pay some other company to put out publicity about it", for the avoidance of doubt
Oct 11, 2014, 9:53 am
#71
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
That "Price per person: Ł0.00" box is misdirection. Retailers don't typically hide their margin in with the VAT on your receipt
Oct 11, 2014, 11:09 am
#73
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
Oct 11, 2014, 11:23 am
#74
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brexile in ADB
Programs: BA, TK, HHonours, Le Club, Best Western Rewards
Posts: 7,067
Anyway to answer the actual question.
All airlines tend to buy the vast majority of fuel on long term contracts at a fixed price, and/or use future and options contracts to fix the price.
The fuel currently being poured into BA aircraft's tanks was "purchase" years ago, so hopefully BA is busy buying up fuel now but the lower price don't be reflected in higher profits (well at least lower losses) or even perhaps cheaper fares for a while.
NOTE - Your car fuel prices have not dropped as the vast majority of the cost of fuel is tax going to the government, lets all hope they spend it wisely and don't p### our money on stupid schemes and vanity projects...
All airlines tend to buy the vast majority of fuel on long term contracts at a fixed price, and/or use future and options contracts to fix the price.
The fuel currently being poured into BA aircraft's tanks was "purchase" years ago, so hopefully BA is busy buying up fuel now but the lower price don't be reflected in higher profits (well at least lower losses) or even perhaps cheaper fares for a while.
NOTE - Your car fuel prices have not dropped as the vast majority of the cost of fuel is tax going to the government, lets all hope they spend it wisely and don't p### our money on stupid schemes and vanity projects...
Oct 11, 2014, 3:28 pm
#75
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Near Edinburgh
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 9,034
This is true, and a little known fact is that BA have run out of fuel storage facilities so now store the fuel in the champagne bottles they carry in their Club Europe cabin.